Results for 'Harm Klossterhuis'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  27
    Universals in Linguistic Theory. (Edited by Emmon Bach, Robert T. Harms ... Contributing Authors, Charles J. Fillmore ... Paul Kiparsky ... James D. McCawley.).Emmon W. Bach & Robert Thomas Harms (eds.) - 1968 - New York, NY, USA: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
    Record of papers given at a symposium held at the University of Texas at Austin, April 1967; includes; C.J. Fillmore - The case for case; E. Bach - Nouns and noun phrases; J.D. McCawley - The role of semantics in a grammar; P. Kiparsky Linguistic universals and linguistic change.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  2. Berichtigung zu Hoffmeisters Besprechung von Harms, Hegel und das 20. Jahrhundert. [REVIEW]Ernst Harms - 1935 - Société Française de Philosophie, Bulletin 40:297.
    No categories
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Berichtigung zu Hoffmeisters Besprechung von Harms, Hegel und das 20. Jahrhundert.Ernst Harms - 1935 - Kant-Studien 40:297.
    No categories
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Idealismus, Jahrbuch Für Die Idealistische Philosophie. Ernst Harms. Vol. I.Ernst Harms - 1935 - Philosophy 10 (37):102-103.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Harming as Making Worse Off.Duncan Purves - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (10):2629-2656.
    A powerful argument against the counterfactual comparative account of harm is that it cannot distinguish harming from failing to benefit. In reply to this problem, I suggest a new account of harm. The account is a counterfactual comparative one, but it counts as harms only those events that make a person occupy his level of well-being at the world at which the event occurs. This account distinguishes harming from failing to benefit in a way that accommodates our intuitions (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  6. Plural Harm.Neil Feit - 2015 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 90 (2):361-388.
    In this paper, I construct and defend an account of harm, specifically, all-things-considered overall harm. I start with a simple comparative account, on which an event harms a person provided that she would have been better off had it not occurred. The most significant problems for this account are overdetermination and preemption cases. However, a counterfactual comparative approach of some sort is needed to make sense of harm, or so I argue. I offer a counterfactual comparative theory (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  7.  25
    Harm to Others.Joel Feinberg - 1987 - Oxford University Press USA.
    This first volume in the four-volume series The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law focuses on the "harm principle," the commonsense view that prevention of harm to persons other than the perpetrator is a legitimate purpose of criminal legislation. Feinberg presents a detailed analysis of the concept and definition of harm and applies it to a host of practical and theoretical issues, showing how the harm principle must be interpreted if it is to be a plausible (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   130 citations  
  8. Harm: Omission, Preemption, Freedom.Nathan Hanna - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 93 (2):251-73.
    The Counterfactual Comparative Account of Harm says that an event is overall harmful for someone if and only if it makes her worse off than she otherwise would have been. I defend this account from two common objections.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  9. Harm to Others.Martin P. Golding - 1987 - Philosophical Review 96 (2):295-298.
    This first volume in the four-volume series The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law focuses on the "harm principle," the commonsense view that prevention of harm to persons other than the perpetrator is a legitimate purpose of criminal legislation. Feinberg presents a detailed analysis of the concept and definition of harm and applies it to a host of practical and theoretical issues, showing how the harm principle must be interpreted if it is to be a plausible (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   140 citations  
  10. The Harm Principle.Nils Holtug - 2002 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):357-389.
    According to the Harm Principle, roughly, the state may coerce a person only if it can thereby prevent harm to others. Clearly, this principle depends crucially on what we understand by harm. Thus, if any sort of negative effect on a person may count as a harm, the Harm Principle will fail to sufficiently protect individual liberty. Therefore, a more subtle concept of harm is needed. I consider various possible conceptions and argue that none (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   43 citations  
  11. Hard Cases Really Aren't That Important: Reflections on Lisa Belkin's First, Do No Harm Simon & Schuster, New York: Ny, 1993, 270pp., $23.00 (Hardbound) David C. Blake, Ph. D., Jd. [REVIEW]Do No Harm First - 1989 - Hec Forum: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Hospitals' Ethical and Legal Issues 5 (6):354 - 36I.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  18
    Harm to Self.Joel Feinberg - 1986
  13. Harm” and Mill’s Harm Principle.Piers Norris Turner - 2014 - Ethics 124 (2):299-326.
    This article addresses the long-standing problem of how to understand Mill’s famous harm principle in light of his failure to specify what counts as “harm” in On Liberty. I argue that standard accounts restricting “harm” to only certain negative consequences fail to do justice to the text, and that this fact forces us to rethink Mill’s defense of individual liberty. I then offer a new account of that defense in which “harm” is understood in an expansive (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  14.  45
    The Harm Principle Cannot Replace the Best Interest Standard: Problems With Using the Harm Principle for Medical Decision Making for Children.Johan Christiaan Bester - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (8):9-19.
    For many years the prevailing paradigm for medical decision making for children has been the best interest standard. Recently, some authors have proposed that Mill’s “harm principle” should be used to mediate or to replace the best interest standard. This article critically examines the harm principle movement and identifies serious defects within the project of using Mill’s harm principle for medical decision making for children. While the harm principle proponents successfully highlight some difficulties in present-day use (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  15. How Harmful Are the Average American's Greenhouse Gas Emissions?John Nolt - 2011 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 14 (1):3-10.
    It has sometimes been claimed (usually without evidence) that the harm caused by an individual's participation in a greenhouse-gas-intensive economy is negligible. Using data from several contemporary sources, this paper attempts to estimate the harm done by an average American. This estimate is crude, and further refinements are surely needed. But the upshot is that the average American is responsible, through his/her greenhouse gas emissions, for the suffering and/or deaths of one or two future people.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   50 citations  
  16.  10
    Crimes, Harms, and Wrongs: On the Principles of Criminalisation.A. P. Simester - 2011 - Hart.
    When should we make use of the criminal law? Crimes, Harms, and Wrongs offers a philosophical analysis of the nature and ethical limits of criminalisation. The authors explore the scope of harm-based prohibitions, proscriptions of offensive behaviour, and 'paternalistic' prohibitions aimed at preventing self-harm, developing guiding principles for these various grounds of state prohibition. Both authors have written extensively in the field. They have produced an integrated, accessible, philosophically-sophisticated account that will be of great interest to legal academics, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  17. Collective Harm and the Inefficacy Problem.Julia Nefsky - 2019 - Philosophy Compass 14 (4):e12587.
    This paper discusses the inefficacy problem that arises in contexts of “collective harm.‘ These are contexts in which by acting in a certain sort of way, people collectively cause harm, or fail to prevent it, but no individual act of the relevant sort seems to itself make a difference. The inefficacy problem is that if acting in the relevant way won’t make a difference, it’s unclear why it would be wrong. Each individual can argue, “things will be just (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  18. Harm and Its Moral Significance.Seana Valentine Shiffrin - 2012 - Legal Theory 18 (3):357-398.
    Standard, familiar models portray harms and benefits as symmetrical. Usually, harm is portrayed as involving a worsening of one's situation, and benefits as involving an improvement. Yet morally, the aversion, prevention, and relief of harms seem, at least presumptively, to matter more than the provision, protection, and maintenance of comparable and often greater benefits. Standard models of harms and benefits have difficulty acknowledging this priority, much less explaining it. They also fail to identify harm accurately and reliably. In (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   32 citations  
  19. Harm to Future Persons: Non-Identity Problems and Counterpart Solutions.Anthony Wrigley - 2012 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (2):175-190.
    Non-Identity arguments have a pervasive but sometimes counter-intuitive grip on certain key areas in ethics. As a result, there has been limited success in supporting the alternative view that our choices concerning future generations can be considered harmful on any sort of person-affecting principle. However, as the Non-Identity Problem relies overtly on certain metaphysical assumptions, plausible alternatives to these foundations can substantially undermine the Non-Identity argument itself. In this paper, I show how the pervasive force and nature of Non-Identity arguments (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  20. A Harm Based Solution to the Non-Identity Problem.Molly Gardner - 2015 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 2:427-444.
    Many of us agree that we ought not to wrong future people, but there remains disagreement about which of our actions can wrong them. Can we wrong individuals whose lives are worth living by taking actions that result in their very existence? The problem of justifying an answer to this question has come to be known as the non-identity problem.[1] While the literature contains an array of strategies for solving the problem,[2] in this paper I will take what I call (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  21. Harm, Affect, and the Moral/Conventional Distinction.Daniel Kelly, Stephen Stich, Kevin J. Haley, Serena J. Eng & Daniel M. T. Fessler - 2007 - Mind and Language 22 (2):117–131.
  22.  97
    Comparative Harm, Creation and Death.Neil Feit - 2016 - Utilitas 28 (2):136-163.
    Given that a person's death is bad for her, when is it bad? I defend subsequentism, the view that things that are bad in the relevant way are bad after they occur. Some have objected to this view on the grounds that it requires us to compare the amount of well-being the victim would have enjoyed, had she not died, with the amount she receives while dead; however, we cannot assign any level of well-being, not even zero, to a dead (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  23. The Harm of Ableism: Medical Error and Epistemic Injustice.David M. Peña-Guzmán & Joel Michael Reynolds - 2019 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 29 (3):205-242.
    This paper argues that epistemic errors rooted in group- or identity- based biases, especially those pertaining to disability, are undertheorized in the literature on medical error. After sketching dominant taxonomies of medical error, we turn to the field of social epistemology to understand the role that epistemic schemas play in contributing to medical errors that disproportionately affect patients from marginalized social groups. We examine the effects of this unequal distribution through a detailed case study of ableism. There are four primary (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  24. Market Harms and Market Benefits.Hayden Wilkinson - forthcoming - Philosophy and Public Affairs.
    Our actions in the marketplace often harm others. For instance, buying and consuming petroleum contributes to climate change and thereby does harm. But there is another kind of harm we do in almost every market interaction: market harms. These are harms inflicted via changes to the goods and/or prices available to the victim in that market. (Similarly, market benefits are those conferred in the same way.) Such harms and benefits may seem morally unimportant, as Judith Jarvis Thomson (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  60
    Harming by Failing to Benefit.Neil Feit - 2017 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (4):809-823.
    In this paper, I consider the problem of omission for the counterfactual comparative account of harm. A given event harms a person, on this account, when it makes her worse off than she would have been if it had not occurred. The problem arises because cases in which one person merely fails to benefit another intuitively seem harmless. The account, however, seems to imply that when one person fails to benefit another, the first thereby harms the second, since the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  26. Responsibility for Collective Epistemic Harms.Will Fleisher & Dunja Šešelja - forthcoming - Philosophy of Science.
    Discussion of epistemic responsibility typically focuses on belief formation and actions leading to it. Similarly, accounts of collective epistemic responsibility have addressed the issue of collective belief formation and associated actions. However, there has been little discussion of collective responsibility for preventing epistemic harms, particularly those preventable only by the collective action of an unorganized group. We propose an account of collective epistemic responsibility which fills this gap. Building on Hindriks' (2019) account of collective moral responsibility, we introduce the Epistemic (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  27. Defensive Harm, Consent, and Intervention.Jonathan Parry - 2017 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 45 (4):356-396.
    Many think that it would be wrong to defend an individual from attack if he competently and explicitly refuses defensive intervention. In this paper, I consider the extent to which the preferences of victims affect the permissibility of defending groups or aggregates. These cases are interesting and difficult because there is no straightforward sense in which a group can univocally consent to or refuse defensive intervention in the same way that an individual can. Among those who have considered this question, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  28. The Harms Beyond Imprisonment: Do We Have Special Moral Obligations Towards the Families and Children of Prisoners?William Bülow - 2014 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (4):775-789.
    This paper discusses whether the collateral harm of imprisonment to the close family members and children of prison inmates may give rise to special moral obligations towards them. Several collateral harms, including decreased psychological wellbeing, financial costs, loss of economic opportunities, and intrusion and control over their private lives, are identified. Two competing perspectives in moral philosophy are then applied in order to assess whether the harms are permissible. The first is consequentialist and the second is deontological. It is (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  29. Harm.Michael Rabenberg - 2014 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 8 (3):1-32.
    In recent years, philosophers have proposed a variety of accounts of the nature of harm. In this paper, I consider several of these accounts and argue that they are unsuccessful. I then make a modest case for a different view.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  30.  49
    Harms and Deprivation of Benefits for Nonhuman Primates in Research.Hope Ferdowsian & Agustín Fuentes - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):143-156.
    The risks of harm to nonhuman primates, and the absence of benefits for them, are critically important to decisions about nonhuman primate research. Current guidelines for review and practice tend to be permissive for nonhuman primate research as long as minimal welfare requirements are fulfilled and human medical advances are anticipated. This situation is substantially different from human research, in which risks of harms to the individual subject are typically reduced to the extent feasible. A risk threshold is needed (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  31.  77
    The Harm of Symbolic Actions and Green-Washing: Corporate Actions and Communications on Environmental Performance and Their Financial Implications. [REVIEW]Kent Walker & Fang Wan - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 109 (2):227-242.
    We examine over 100 top performing Canadian firms in visibly polluting industries as we seek to answer four research questions: What specific environmental issues are firms addressing? How do these issues differ between industries? Are both symbolic and substantive actions financially beneficial? Does green-washing, measured as the difference between symbolic and substantive action, and/or green-highlighting, measured as the combined effect of symbolic and substantive actions, pay? We find that substantive actions of environmental issues (green walk) neither harm nor benefit (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  32. Comparing Harms: Headaches and Human Lives.Alastair Norcross - 1997 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 26 (2):135-167.
  33. Harm to Others: The Social Cost of Antibiotics in Agriculture.Jonny Anomaly - 2009 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (5):423-435.
    See "What's Wrong with Factory Farming?" (2015) for an updated treatment of these issues.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  34.  29
    Climate Harms.Garrett Cullity - 2019 - The Monist 102 (1):22-41.
    How should we think of the relationship between the climate harms that people will suffer in the future and our current emissions activity? Who does the harming, and what are the moral implications? One way to address these questions appeals to facts about the expected harm associated with one’s own individual energy-consuming activity, and argues that it is morally wrong not to offset one’s own personal carbon emissions. The first half of the article questions the strength of this argument. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  35.  16
    Harm as a Necessary Component of the Concept of Medical Disorder: Reply to Muckler and Taylor.Jerome C. Wakefield & Jordan A. Conrad - 2020 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 45 (3):350-370.
    Wakefield’s harmful dysfunction analysis asserts that the concept of medical disorder includes a naturalistic component of dysfunction and a value component, both of which are required for disorder attributions. Muckler and Taylor, defending a purely naturalist, value-free understanding of disorder, argue that harm is not necessary for disorder. They provide three examples of dysfunctions that, they claim, are considered disorders but are entirely harmless: mild mononucleosis, cowpox that prevents smallpox, and minor perceptual deficits. They also reject the proposal that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  36. Dignity, Harm, and Hate Speech.Robert Mark Simpson - 2013 - Law and Philosophy 32 (6):701-728.
    This paper examines two recent contributions to the hate speech literature – by Steven Heyman and Jeremy Waldron – which seek a justification for the legal restriction of hate speech in an account of the way that hate speech infringes against people’s dignity. These analyses look beyond the first-order hurts and disadvantages suffered by the immediate targets of hate speech, and consider the prospect of hate speech sustaining complex social structures whose wide-scale operations lower the social status of members of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  37.  23
    Whose Harm? Which Metaphysic?Abram Brummett - 2019 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 40 (1):43-61.
    Douglas Diekema has argued that it is not the best interest standard, but the harm principle that serves as the moral basis for ethicists, clinicians, and the courts to trigger state intervention to limit parental authority in the clinic. Diekema claims the harm principle is especially effective in justifying state intervention in cases of religiously motivated medical neglect in pediatrics involving Jehovah’s Witnesses and Christian Scientists. I argue that Diekema has not articulated a harm principle that is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  38.  27
    Harm Should Not Be a Necessary Criterion for Mental Disorder: Some Reflections on the DSM-5 Definition of Mental Disorder.Maria Cristina Amoretti & Elisabetta Lalumera - 2019 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 40 (4):321-337.
    The general definition of mental disorder stated in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders seems to identify a mental disorder with a harmful dysfunction. However, the presence of distress or disability, which may be bracketed as the presence of harm, is taken to be merely usual, and thus not a necessary requirement: a mental disorder can be diagnosed as such even if there is no harm at all. In this paper, we focus (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  39. Posthumous Harm.Steven Luper - 2004 - American Philosophical Quarterly 41 (1):63 - 72.
    According to Epicurus (1966a,b), neither death, nor anything that occurs later, can harm those who die, because people who die are not made to suffer as a result of either. In response, many philosophers (e.g., Nagel 1970, Feinberg 1984, and Pitcher 1984) have argued that Epicurus is wrong on both counts. They have defended the mortem thesis: death may harm those who die. They have also defended the post-mortem thesis: posthumous events may harm people who die. Their (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  40.  19
    A Harm Reduction Approach to the Ethical Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Daniel Weinstock - 2020 - Public Health Ethics 13 (2):166-175.
    The post-confinement phase of the COVID-19 pandemic will require that governments navigate more complex ethical questions than had occurred in the initial, ‘curve-flattening’ phase, and that will occur when the pandemic is in the past. By looking at the unavoidable harms involved in the confinement and quarantine methods employed during the initial phase of the pandemic, we can develop a harm reduction approach to managing the phase during which society will be gradually reopened in a context of managed risk. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  41. Mortal Harm.Steven Luper - 2007 - Philosophical Quarterly 57 (227):239–251.
    The harm thesis says that death may harm the individual who dies. The posthumous harm thesis says that posthumous events may harm those who die. Epicurus rejects both theses, claiming that there is no subject who is harmed, no clear harm which is received, and no clear time when any harm is received. Feldman rescues the harm thesis with solutions to Epicurus' three puzzles based on his own version of the deprivation account of (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  42.  23
    Harm and the Concept of Medical Disorder.Neil Feit - 2017 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 38 (5):367-385.
    According to Jerome Wakefield’s harmful dysfunction analysis of medical disorder, the inability of some internal part or mechanism to perform its natural function is necessary, but not sufficient, for disorder. HDA also requires that the part dysfunction be harmful to the individual. I consider several problems for HDA’s harm criterion in this article. Other accounts on which harm is necessary for disorder will suffer from all or almost all of these problems. Comparative accounts of harm imply that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  43. The Harm Principle and Parental Licensing.Andrew Jason Cohen - 2017 - Social Theory and Practice 43 (4):825-849.
    Hugh LaFollette proposed parental licensing in 1980 (and 2010)--not as a requirement for pregnancy, but for raising a child. If you have a baby, are not licensed, and do not get licensed, the baby would be put up for adoption. Despite the intervention required in an extremely personal area of life, I argue that those who endorse the harm principle ought to endorse parental licensing of this sort. Put differently, I show how the harm principle strengthens the case (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  44. Harms and Wrongs in Epistemic Practice.Simon Barker, Charlie Crerar & Trystan S. Goetze - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 84:1-21.
    This volume has its roots in two recent developments within mainstream analytic epistemology: a growing recognition over the past two or three decades of the active and social nature of our epistemic lives; and, more recently still, the increasing appreciation of the various ways in which the epistemic practices of individuals and societies can, and often do, go wrong. The theoretical analysis of these breakdowns in epistemic practice, along with the various harms and wrongs that follow as a consequence, constitutes (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  45. Harm to Self.Joel Feinberg & Donald Vandeveer - 1988 - Ethics 98 (3):550-565.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   90 citations  
  46.  40
    Delusions, Harmful Dysfunctions, and Treatable Conditions.Peter Clutton & Stephen Gadsby - 2018 - Neuroethics 11 (2):167-181.
    It has recently been suggested that delusions be conceived of as symptoms on the harmful dysfunction account of disorder: delusions sometimes arise from dysfunction, but can also arise through normal cognition. Much attention has thus been payed to the question of how we can determine whether a delusion arises from dysfunction as opposed to normal cognition. In this paper, we consider another question, one that remains under-explored: which delusions warrant treatment? On the harmful dysfunction account, this question dissociates from the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  47. Justifying Harm.David Rodin - 2011 - Ethics 122 (1):74-110.
  48. The Harmful Dysfunction Analysis of Mental Disorder.Dominic Murphy & Robert L. Woolfolk - 2000 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 7 (4):241-252.
    This paper is a critical analysis of the concept of mental disorder recently advanced by Jerome Wakefield. Wakefield suggests that mental disorders are most aptly conceived as "harmful dysfunctions" involving two distinct and separable components: the failure of the mechanism in the person to perform a natural function for which the mechanism was designed by natural selection, and a value judgment that the dysfunction is undesirable.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  49.  64
    Lies, Harm, And Practical Interests.Andreas Stokke - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98 (2):329-345.
    This paper outlines an account of the ethics of lying, which accommodates two main ideas about lying. The first of these, Anti-Deceptionalism, is the view that lying does not necessarily involve intentions to deceive. The second, Anti-Absolutism, is the view that lying is not always morally wrong. It is argued that lying is not wrong in itself, but rather the wrong in lying is explained by different factors in different cases. In some cases such factors may include deceptive intentions on (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  50. Illocutionary harm.Henry Ian Schiller - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 178 (5):1631-1646.
    A number of philosophers have become interested in the ways that individuals are subject to harm as the performers of illocutionary acts. This paper offers an account of the underlying structure of such harms: I argue that speakers are the subjects of illocutionary harm when there is interference in the entitlement structure of their linguistic activities. This interference comes in two forms: denial and incapacitation. In cases of denial, a speaker is prevented from achieving the outcomes to which (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 1000